ARIZONAArizona received $3,920,566 in federal funds for
Arizona Sexuality Education Law and Policy Arizona Administrative Code R7-2-303 states that schools may “provide a specific elective lesson or lessons concerning sex education as a supplement to the health course of study.” In order for a student to take the class, the school must have the “written request of the student’s parents or guardian.” In addition, the school must:
The local governing board:
Arizona’s Comprehensive Health Education Standards do not include STD/HIV education. Arizona requires written consent for any sexuality education class. This is referred to as an “opt-in” policy. See Arizona Revised Statutes Sections 15-716, 15-102 and R7-2-303. Recent Legislation Legislation Requires Standards for Teen Pregnancy and Parenting; Could Lead to Funding for Programs Family Information and Youth Protection Act Introduced Events of Note Middle School Sexuality Education Program Expands Some parents were uncomfortable with the decision to discuss oral and anal sex with middle school students. “That makes a lot of people uncomfortable,” one community member explained. “I’m not sure that they [sixth graders] are developmentally ready as a group. They are very young.” Many educators and parents, however, supported the board’s decision. “It’s very important that students have the information they need to make good decisions,” the district’s director of curriculum and instruction explained. “They’re hearing phenomenal amounts of misinformation. Education’s about connecting the dots.” A member of the committee that recommended the curriculum changes explained that the group thought it was “critical” that certain sexual behaviors were explained in detail, “because a large percentage of young people think Bill Clinton was correct that oral sex is not the same as intercourse.”2 An eighth-grader at Kyrene del Pueblo Middle School agreed that her peers needed to understand that STDs can be contracted through a variety of behaviors other than vaginal intercourse. “They think only intercourse is going to get them into sickness,” she said.3 Kyrene parents were given the opportunity to review suggested sexuality education books, DVDs, and other teaching materials under consideration. The learning tools, including specific classroom lessons, were on public display for at least 60 days before the board votes. The board was also scheduled to hold special information sessions on the proposed materials to allow parents to voice their opinions. Tucson-Based Christian Group Travels to Uganda to Promote Abstinence The group was excited about the chance to carry its goals abroad. One 18-year-old member discussed the personal significance of the group, “It’s like this team has brought me closer to God. We’re all very educated about abstinence—we know what God wants us to do and what we want for our lives.”4 Last year, the group, a ministry of Crisis Pregnancy Centers of Tucson, received a $25,000 grant from the State Department of Health and Human Services, and it aims to apply for federal funding this year. Book Depicting Date Rape Raises Questions about Censorship The State Superintendent of Public Instruction recommended banning the book from all school libraries. However, each school may decide whether to allow any books into its own library. While some school districts oppose the banning of books altogether, others believe that censorship is necessary and removed the book from the shelves. For example, the high school in the Flowing Wells Unified School District reviewed the book, and decided to make it available on reserve only. The author of the book, Stephen Chbosky, agrees that the publication is not appropriate for elementary school students. However, he believes that high schools should allow the book because it contains an important message for teenagers.5 Arizona’s Youth: Statistical Information of Note6
Title V Abstinence-Only-Until-Marriage Funding Arizona uses Title V abstinence-only-until-marriage funding to contract with 13 sub-grantees: Arizona-Mexico Border Health Foundation, Arizona Psychology Services, Arizona Youth Partnership (Rural Pima, Apache, and South Navajo Counties), Arizona Youth Partnership (Gila and Pinal Counties), Catholic Social Services of Central and Northern Arizona, Catholic Social Services–Yavapai County, Child & Family Resources (Santa Cruz County), Child & Family Resources, Inc. (Tucson), Crisis Pregnancy Centers of Greater Phoenix, Inc., Northern Arizona University, Pima Prevention Partnership, Pinal County Department of Public Health, and the University of Arizona Maricopa Cooperative Extension. These sub-grantees use a variety of curricula including Choosing the Best LIFE, Choosing the Best PATH, Choosing the Best WAY, Connections/Love U2 series, Girl Talk/Guy Talk, Baby Think it Over, Teen Interactive Theater Curriculum, WAIT Training, and Worth the Wait. SIECUS reviewed Choosing the Best LIFE and found that it names numerous physical and psychological consequences of premarital sexual activity, suggests that sexually active teens will never have happy futures, and implies that only teens with low self-esteem and poor judgment become sexually active. For example, Choosing the Best LIFE states that “relationships often lower the self-respect of both partners—one feeling used, the other feeling like the user. Emotional pain can cause a downward spiral leading to intense feelings of lack of worthlessness (sic).”9 SIECUS reviewed Choosing the Best PATH and found that it provides endless information on the negative consequences of premarital sexual activity and utilizes a variety of tactics to suggest that teens should feel guilty, embarrassed, and ashamed of sexual behavior. For example, Choosing the Best PATH asks students, “How does being sexually active as a teen affect how a person feels about himself or herself?” The suggested answer is, “Can feel sad about losing virginity, loss of self-respect, blames self for getting pregnant or contracting an STD.” It goes on to say, “Sexual activity also can lead to the trashing of a person’s reputation, resulting in the loss of friends.”10 SIECUS reviewed WAIT Training and found that it contains little medical or biological information and almost no information about STDs, including HIV/AIDS. Instead, it contains information and statistics about marriage, many of which are outdated and not supported by scientific research. It also contains messages of fear and shame and biased views of gender, sexual orientation, and family type. For example, WAIT Training explains that “men sexually are like microwaves and women sexually are like crockpots….A woman is stimulated more by touch and romantic words. She is far more attracted by a man’s personality while a man is stimulated by sight. A man is usually less discriminating about those to whom he is physically attracted.”11 SIECUS reviewed Worth the Wait and found that it covers some important topics related to sexuality such as puberty, anatomy, and sexual abuse, and that the curriculum is based on reliable sources of data. Despite these strengths, Worth the Wait relies on messages of fear, discourages contraceptive use, and promotes biased views of gender, marriage, and pregnancy options. For example, the curriculum claims that “teenage sexual activity can create a multitude of medical, legal, and economic problems not only for the individuals having sex but for society as a whole.” In addition to using several of these curricula, Arizona Youth Partnership uses Soul Mate and Big Talk for Parents to target rural and Native American youth.12 The organization reports on its website that 81% of 11-year-olds involved in its program “made a commitment to abstain until marriage.”13 Research has found that under certain conditions such commitments, often called virginity pledges, may help some adolescents delay sexual intercourse. When they work, pledges help this select group of adolescents delay the onset of sexual intercourse for an average of 18 months—far short of marriage. Researchers found that pledges only worked when taken by a small group of students. Pledges taken by a whole class were ineffective. More importantly, the studies also found that those young people who took a pledge were one-third less likely to use contraception when they did become sexually active than their peers who had not pledged. These teens are therefore more vulnerable to the risks of unprotected sexual activity such as unintended pregnancy and STDs, including HIV/AIDS. Further research has confirmed that although some students who take pledges delay intercourse, ultimately they are just as likely to contract an STD as their non-pledging peers. The study also found that the STD rates were higher in communities where a significant proportion (over 20%) of the young people had taken virginity pledges.14 Crisis Pregnancy Centers of Greater Phoenix displays no information about its abstinence-only-until-marriage programs on its website. However, the organization is a member of the Arizona Life Coalition and its Outreach Director is named as an “Agent” of the Arizona Life Rally.15 Crisis pregnancy centers typically advertise as providing medical services and then use anti-abortion propaganda, misinformation, and fear and shame tactics to dissuade women facing unintended pregnancy from exercising their right to choose. Title V Evaluation In 2003, Arizona released the evaluation of its Title V abstinence-only-until-marriage program, which served more than 123,000 youth in schools, community centers, and detention centers between 1998 and 2003. Fourteen different curricula were used, including A.C. Green’s Game Plan, Choosing the Best LIFE, Choosing the Best PATH, Choosing the Best WAY, FACTS, and WAIT Training. The programs were evaluated through surveys of the participants conducted before the programs (pre-test), immediately afterwards (post-test), and 3–13 months after program participation (follow-up). Post-test results showed an increase in teens’ intent to pursue abstinence; however, follow-up surveys conducted months later found statistically significant declines in teens’ intent to pursue abstinence.16 Among teens who had remained abstinent, 47% reported that they would likely become sexually active in the next year and 80% reported that they would likely become sexually active by age 20.17 According to the evaluation, post-test results also revealed that “the direction of change on attitudes toward birth control was toward a less favorable view at post-test. This might be explained by the program’s focus on the failure rates of contraceptives as opposed to their availability, use, and access.”18 The presentation of the abstinence-only-until-marriage message was also perceived as moralistic by many students and parents. The evaluators explained that “programs that present the message in a fashion that cultivates skills and practice are more likely to be effective than programs that are perceived as saying ‘Do this because it is right.’”19 Community-Based Abstinence Education (CBAE) and Adolescent Family Life Act (AFLA) Grantees Catholic Social Services of Central and Northern Arizona is a faith-based organization that focuses on promoting adoption and providing abstinence-only-until-marriage programs. The organization runs a variety of activities for youth ages 10–18 through its abstinence-only-until-marriage programs including sports and service learning programs. Catholic Charities also sponsors the Teenage Pregnancy Prevention Program (TAPP), which “is comprised of high school students that are committed to making healthy choices, like staying sober and waiting until marriage to have sex.”20 TAPP sponsors alternative activities after proms and graduations. In 2006, it awarded three area schools $2000, $1500, and $500 respectively for their events. 21 One of these alternative events was the “Chain of Promises” pledge program. (See Title V section for more information on virginity pledges.) Americans for a Better Tomorrow, Inc. sponsors “Power Fitness for Youth,” a nine-week body fitness and character program for students in grades seven and eight. The program includes a character-building segment which promulgates misleading information about condom use. For example, it incorrectly states that “condoms are virtually ineffective in preventing the transmission of HPV (Human Papillomavirus) due to skin-to-skin contact of this viral STD (rather than the transmission of bodily fluids).”22 In truth, according to the CDC, condoms are effective against HPV and cervical cancer. It is true that condoms cannot provide complete protection from HPV, in part because infections may occur on sites not covered by the condom. However, the CDC says that “laboratory studies have demonstrated that latex condoms provide an essentially impermeable barrier to particles the size of HPV” and that “studies of HPV infection in men demonstrate that most HPV infections are located on parts of the penis that would be covered by a condom.”23 In addition, according to a University of Washington study published in the New England Journal of Medicine, consistent condom use can cut a woman’s risk of HPV infection by 70 percent and protect her from developing precancerous cervical changes.24 Pima Prevention Partnership runs the Partnership Project Pledge (Project Pledge), an abstinence-only until-marriage program. Project Pledge uses the Choosing the Best curricula in middle and high schools. (See Title V section for more information on the Choosing the Best curricula.) In addition, Project Pledge’s website contains incorrect and misleading information. Under the FAQ section, in response to the question “Are contraceptives effective?,” the website states, “No, because you can still catch diseases and sometimes get pregnant.”26 Moreover, in answer to the question, “What are the symptoms of STDs?,” it provides only a vague and incomplete list: “rration [sic], bumps, blisters or sores.”27 And, in response to the question, “If someone has sex, what are the consequences?,” the website answers, “Possibly could get pregnant or catch diseases and experience a damaged reputation, a sense of guilt and shame, physical pain. This can lead to a feeling a [sic] being alone or distracted.”28 Federal and State Funding for Abstinence-Only-Until-Marriage Programs in FY 2006
Title V Abstinence-Only-Until-Marriage Coordinator
Arizona Organizations that Support Comprehensive Sexuality Education
References
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Home |
Publications |
Support SIECUS |
Links |
About SIECUS |
Site Navigation |
Search |
Donate |
Contact Us
Policy & Advocacy |
Media |
International |
Library |
Youth Development |
School Health Education Clearinghouse
copyright ©
1996-2007, SIECUS
Web Master: siecus@siecus.org
Print